RAJIV KHANNA Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 278/2023 of PS Greater Kailash for offences under Sec. 279/337 IPC on the ground that the complainant de facto (respondent no.2) has settled the criminal case with the petitioner. Respondent no.2 is present in court and identified by IO/ASI Parveen. Learned APP for State and respondent no.2 in person accept notice.

(2.) It appears from prosecution case that the petitioner while driving his vehicle allegedly in rash and negligent manner hit respondent no.2, causing him simple hurt. Now, they have settled the criminal case. Looking into the age and physical condition of respondent no.2, it would be onerous on him to adjourn the matter for recording formal statement before the Joint Registrar. As such, I have personally spoken with petitioner as well as respondent no.2.

(3.) The parties had arrived at a settlement before the Mediation Centre on 4/6/2025 and in accordance with the settlement, the petitioner has paid today, a sum of Rs.40,000.00 to respondent no.2 by way of two demand drafts of equal amount towards full and final settlement of the criminal case.